The Space Force is clever and fun finger flingy stuff. Some of the other magic was OK. It was hard to read without effect descriptions. Just launched right into the method or set up. No foreplay!! :(

As for the parody parts, Foo Can turns into Poo Can. The inference that a ten year old smokes pot seems, hardly, a parody.

I wasn't sure if the kids wanting help with their virginity wanted help keeping it or getting rid of it. :confused:

As for your backside, that had been covered (uncovered) by Genii and D&Ls months ago.

Majoke found a bitter reality. Such biting "parody" doesn't suit the magic populace. Perhaps you'll find web-sters that think it's funny but alot of them, being new to magic, won't get some of the inside digs.

Stick to the magic, the parody will wear thin real fast. It comes off as jealousy.

Like Ryan said, Foocan "is not for everybody". I thought the first issue was very good although it was a little thin. The tricks were strong and the Space Force has the potential for many applications. This e-mag has the kind of satire I enjoy. I am guessing that future issues will have more tricks as more people contribute.

This is a nice first effort and I hope Foo Can continues to prosper and improve. As an e-magazine, Foo Can is well constructed and well written. I enjoyed reading the product reviews and the clearly neat effects (just how many card tricks can Peter Duffie invent?).

Turn offs were the review of the Jon Tremaine videos (I actually want to know why some one thinks the videos are terrible.) and a satire bit called Half-Stoned. While some of the satire was good, Half Stoned is juvenile and detracts from the quality of the rest of the finished work.

Those are my constructive comments and I hope they are taken as such.

Will I subscribe? I will have to think about that carefully since I have limited time and I already have too much magic-related material to read in the first place.

Regardless, I wish Foo Can much success for the future. Keep up the great work and thank you for the free first copy. :)

My own personal feeling is that acrimony isn't cute or necessary, but to each his own.

I absolutely don't agree about the Jon Tremaine "Close-up Mentalism" tape. Did you notice the reactions of the customer/audience?

And TSD? Well, it went private because of "trolls" [those who constantly disrupt discussion groups because of evil agendas, mental illness (as is the case at a Beatles newsgroup currently), or boredom]. There were costs associated with maintaining the networking and storage services, so Jason had to charge. I don't know, maybe he made a small profit...but I doubt it.

I'm older than you, so I'm probably just tired of mean-spiritedness...and tired in general ;). Go for it and get it out of your system. Humor is subjective and you'll find your audience.

And the magic was fun in the first issue, too. Thanks for sharing it with us.

Steve H

ps: Robert: Yeah, how DOES Peter Duffy come up with all these routines?

Tom is right in one criticism: Robin & I shouldn't have just gone right into our trick without some description of the effect. Normally we do have one for each trick. The trick was originally destined for Onyx and that's the way Ken Simmons wanted it. After Onyx imploded, we forgot to rewrite it when we sent it to Ryan.

BTW - I believe there are no effect-descriptions in Lorayne's new 750 page book :-)

ROBERT & STEVE: Thanks for your kind remarks guys, but please note that I didn't come up with this trick. Over the past few years I have been brainstorming ideas with Robin Robertson. The current trick in Foo-Can is one example of 200+. All our tricks are jointly presented as Duffie/Robertson.

Of course I am still coming up with ideas on my own, and so to answer the question:

Originally posted by Tom Cutts:As for the parody parts, Foo Can turns into Poo Can. The inference that a ten year old smokes pot seems, hardly, a parody.

Where is that inference? :confused: There is a mild 'spliff' reference made in regard to Aaron Smith (I assume its to him) and there is a thing in the half stoned section (which i thought was a good parody piece) apparently from a 10 year old, but the two are not connected.

There were one or two parts of foo can that i didnt like but i guess that is ok. on the whole i liked it and think its going to be worth a subscription. And I hope they keep the humor as well as the magic.

If you've been wondering why no response from Ryan or myself, we wanted to hear the feedbackand not get into some defensive position.

Love Foo Can, or hate it, we are proud of the work.

Having said that, we asked for feedback so we could make it better.

So without getting defensive, I do want to answer some of the things that have come up, and then leave this topic alone again. If people wish to continue discussing Foo can here, that's fine. If you have further feedback that you wish us to consider, please email it to feedback@foocan.com

Both Robert Kane and Steve Hook mentioned the Tremain quick review. As have numerous people who have emailed or phoned me. It's probably been the most criticized part of the issue, and I will learn from the negative feedback we've had on that review.

The other points that Steve and Robert made were also excellent and in both cases taken constructively.